On Friday 10 February 2006 01:52, David Vallner wrote:
> Da Piatok 10 Februr 2006 00:34 tsumeruby / tsumelabs.com napsal:
> > Well, I'll reply in the middle of the paragraph. I usually think about
> > ruby bindings; how much they are complete and are they stable the
> > bindings are compared to others. Qt might be the best toolkit to use,
> > however the ruby bindings are not frozen yet, hence I don't want to use
> > it until rdale stops modifying how the toolkit works. He just made the
> > signal/slots similar to how rails works. GTK is very stable and one of
> > the two top best at stability. Tk is the most stable of course, being
> > around longer since all of the other toolkits, and now in 1.8.4 having
> > the method to switch all the tk methods to use tile so the developer
> > doesn't have to call on tile widgets. FOX is okay, but when you don't
> > call methods right, you end up with crappy code because you can't find
> > which method you called wrong when you have a 5000 line script. I don't
> > write line by line, execute as I type each out like a new programmer, I
> > write half complete programs before I start testing.
>
> Hmm, how "rubyish" are the Qt and GTK bindings anyway? I have personally a
> HUGE pet peeve against ever writing using for example #set_foo in a ruby
> binding instead of #foo= (wxRuby);
That particular thing is solved for Qt4 -
http://www.kdedevelopers.org/node/1686
> goes for camelCase in method names, or
> Hungarian notation in class names instead of using module namespaces (FOX).
> Even if there's probably very good reasons for both of those, and if not,
> possibly very unreasonable to change them now, my mind still has problems
> switching between naming conventions mid-script.
But the camelCase is still there.
Mark
>
> David Vallner